mitchweber wrote:SacTown Kings wrote:^^ It's not completely untrue. What I meant or should of said was trading Miller and Salmons for Gooden and Nocioni does nothing to help us sign a free agent in 2010, so again I am not sure what cap space you are talking about. I have posted on here many times our salaries and we will not have any money to go after anyone. Whereas if we traded Salmons and Miller for expirings then we WOULD have money to go after someone. You can say there were not any offers of all expirings for those two but rumors would state otherwise. I just think Petrie really likes Nocioni and wanted him over expirings. So in short you are wrong it is not completely untrue because I beleive we could of traded Salmons and Miller for expirings and had money to play with but getting Noc in return ruined any chance of that happening.
Ok so I double checked. We will be at 45 million, add another 5 to 6 million for our draft picks now we are at 50-51 million. And this is not counting giving Cants the QO which would be another 3.6 million bring us to 54 million. So ok you are right to an extent. We will be under the cap but not nearly enough to do anything except maybe absorb some salary in a trade. Even if we let Cants go we still would not have much to go after someone.
I'm saying that with regards to FAs this year, the Nocioni trade only made us much more flexible. Next year, it added about 1.7mil onto our cap. But my point was that the trade only helped our flexibility this summer.
And what rumors exactly would state otherwise? Every single thing at the time seemed to indicate that every deal had us taking back a Marcus Banks, or at least some kind of contract like that. Straight expirings never appeared to be an option around this deadline.
And again, I'm not saying that we'll have a ton of money this summer, just that to say that the Nocioni trade hurt that or "ruined any chance we had at signing a free agent worth more than the MLE" is factually incorrect.
I am not going to go back through all the rumors but I know what I read. Even in your case where we had to take back Banks is a lot better than taking Noc. Take a look at Banks contract and then look at Noc and tell me what player would give us more flexibility this year. So like I said trading for Noc ruined any chance we might of had of getting a good free agent this year. That is a factual statement. Sure standing pat with Miller and Salmons would ruin any chance as well, I am not disputing that. But trading for Noc has ruined any chance, I am not sure how you can say otherwise.
Even if we took Banks and let Cants go we could have around 9 million to play with, maybe a little more. However, I am not as upset as it might seem because I don't think there is really anyone worth going after except Sessions and he doesn't derserve huge money.
